This inspection was completed by one Adult Social Care inspector. The inspector gathered evidence against the outcomes we inspected during the course of two working days, to help answer our five key questions; Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led? Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people who used the service, and their relatives, care staff, the manager, visiting professionals and from looking at records. If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read our full report.Is the service safe?
People we spoke with who used the service told us they felt well looked after.
People told us that the staff were kind and responsive to their needs. Pre-admission assessments had been carried out by senior staff and care plans contained sufficient information to ensure staff had the correct information to provide safe and effective care.
Safeguarding procedures were in place and staff understood how to protect people they supported. People we saw were not being put at unnecessary risk and where possible, they (or their relatives) were able to make decisions about the care and support provided.
On the days we were present at the home we found there were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people's needs. Staff were deployed appropriately to ensure staffing levels were adequate to meet people's needs.
Is the service effective?
We observed staff interacted with people who used the service and saw that staff met people's needs in a friendly and relaxed manner. Relatives we spoke with told us that they were more than happy with the care provided at the home. One person said: 'It's all down to the care'.
The health and personal care needs of those who used the service had been thoroughly assessed.
We saw that people who used the service had been involved in the care planning process. Where required, consent to care had been obtained. We saw evidence that people who used the service and their relatives had been involved in reviews of care planning and risk assessments.
We saw evidence of visits by professionals such as district nurses, GP's and social workers. One visiting professional told us: 'They work with us very well'.
People who used the service received visits from other care professionals such as chiropodists and a hairdresser.
Is the service caring?
We spoke with eight people who used the service and five relatives who were visiting people who used the service. We asked about the care they or their relative received. Feedback was all positive. People who used the service told us staff were kind and caring towards them whilst relatives we spoke with had nothing but praise for the home and the staff.
Throughout our time at the home we observed staff treated people with dignity and respect. People who used the service were offered choices and care was provided in a relaxed and calm manner. Staff we spoke with were able to tell us about the individual likes and dislikes of people they cared for.
When we spoke with staff it was clear that they genuinely cared for the people they supported and they were observed speaking with people in a respectful and friendly manner.
We looked at care files for people who used the service and found that information was recorded in a person centred way. Risk assessments were in place and files contained sufficient information for staff to meet the needs of people who used the service.
Is the service responsive?
We observed that staff responded to people well by anticipating their needs appropriately. The service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people received care in a consistent way.
Is the service well-led?
Where shortfalls or concerns were raised these were acted upon by the service. People's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people's wishes.
We found that service had effective monitoring systems in place so the quality of service provided could be reviewed and if necessary changed.
.
We observed constant interaction by staff with people who used the service and their relatives. Relatives told us that they were always being asked for their opinion on the service.
Audit systems were in place to check the safety and quality of the service provided. All equipment was regularly serviced and tested. We noted a suggestion box was available for people to provide feedback and the home had an effective system for dealing with complaints.
Staff we spoke with had a good understanding of their roles. They were confident in reporting any concerns and they felt well supported by the manager of the service.